He was still a billionaire* who grew in popularity due to TV (Larry King) came in to shake up the establishment. He also, much like Trump, offered no real answers or solutions to problems and said things like, "we need to clean out the barn. (Drain the swamp?)." The biggest difference is that, when people started realizing this guy had no real plan, his polling numbers dropped. When it became apparent that asshat had no solutions, his numbers went up. I think the Perot-Trump comparison shows more about us than them.

* - A real, true billionaire. Not a phony that's propped up by daddy's money and effective marketing.

In June, Perot led a Gallup poll with 39% of the vote.[27] By mid-July, the Washington Post reported that Perot's campaign managers were becoming increasingly disillusioned by his unwillingness to follow their adviceto be more specific on issues,[28]and his need to be in full control of operations[28] with such tactics as forcing volunteers to sign loyalty oaths.[29] Perot's poll numbers began to slip to 25%, and his advisers warned that if he continued to ignore them, he would fall into single digits. Co-manager Hamilton Jordan threatened to quit, and on July 15, Ed Rollins resigned after Perot fired advertisement specialist Hal Riney, who worked with Rollins on the Reagan campaign. Rollins would later claim that a member of the campaign accused him of being a Bush plant with ties to the CIA.[30] Amid the chaos, Perot's support fell to 20%.

I have clear memories of the post election time 1992 where some Republicans were saying that the Electoral College needed to be abolished because it was unfair that places like New York and California could go all in for a Democrat when most of the states votes Republican.

Democrats, of course, said that EC was sacred and was perfects. the times changed quickly.